User talk:Homestarmy
I am sorry for destroying your hard work. I might hate religion, but it was not right what I did and for that I am sorry. You worked hard and I ruined it. Aquinas666 18:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC) unDELETED!! Welcome back ;) If you spot any more vandalism please drop me a line on my talk page and I will try to fix it. It was a person running a vandalbot, so the changes were very rapid and very unpleasant to undo :( nsandwich 18:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC) Was there no ability to roll back the database, it seems you deleted my talk page and I was trying to talk to the vandal about important stuff :/. Homestarmy 18:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC) Sorry HA. There's no rollback function that I know of. In the administrator's guide, it says to contact the developers directly if something like this happens. That is what I am about to do, because I don't think anything legitimate was added after a particular time. So hopefully we can just roll it back. Please don't add anything for the moment as I am going to try to contact the developers right now. nsandwich 18:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC) Very well :/. Homestarmy 18:46, 24 March 2006 (UTC) :Don't worry. You wouldn't have gotten through to me anyway. I am not a believer and never will be. Just focus on fixing what I ruined. Sorry again. Aquinas666 18:47, 24 March 2006 (UTC) ::Your pastor may of messed up your life, but the reason that we have faith is because Jesus gives us new lives, there is no amount of pain He cannot fix..... Homestarmy 18:51, 24 March 2006 (UTC) :::I hate all religion. I spend all my free time fighting to stop it. I protest at churches, vandalise Wikipedia and today your Wiki (I am almost always banned from all Christian Wikis) and spit on clergy members. Aquinas666 18:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC) ::::This might sound mean, but you might be making them more happy and strong in faith than sad and reluctant to continue, Jesus said to rejoice when people persecute you after all. And one reason for that is so that there is always a chance we can reach people no matter what they do, even yourself, the real Christian objective is not to hurt people, but to help save them by showing them the way, no matter who they are or what they have done. Homestarmy 18:58, 24 March 2006 (UTC) :::::You know what Aquinas, no matter what you choose to believe, and it is your choice, we're here for you. Personally, I can be tolerant of your choice, I hope that you can be tolerant of ours as well. Tolerance of course doesn't mean you have to go out of your way to be nice to us, it just means mutual respect, at the very least. Wishing you all the best. nsandwich 19:06, 24 March 2006 (UTC) Homestarmy, I have been granted the power of the Holy Adminship! Which means that I can ressurect your old talk page. You can find it at /Oldpage. Archola 08:02, 26 March 2006 (UTC) :I think the person is gone now :(. Homestarmy 17:21, 26 March 2006 (UTC) Vandalism I got one of the devs to help out. They're very friendly. Still a couple more reverts to do but shouldn't take long. Feel free to make changes and additions again HA. nsandwich 19:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC) :I didn't see anything happen, are you sure they fixed things? the recent changes log looks the same.... Homestarmy 19:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC) ::It's ok he said that almost everything was back to normal so to go ahead. He personally didn't have the access to do the SQL statement to revert the DB. He could contact someone but he said at this point there was very little left to fix, and I agreed. nsandwich 19:17, 24 March 2006 (UTC) :::Well there's all those nonsense pages now in the browse list to remove :/ Homestarmy 19:20, 24 March 2006 (UTC) Adsense To the administrator, could you please use the Google AdSense tools to ban the showing of the following website: www.Godwithoutreligion.com . It appears to be quite non-Christian and might be very confusing if anyone clicks on it. Homestarmy 13:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC) and www.EveryStudent.com, which appears to be a comparative religion site attempting to lump Christianity in with all other religions, which I would guess would present it in a highly biased, negative manner. Homestarmy 13:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC) And www.bookbind.net, a Jehovah's witness site. Homestarmy 13:42, 24 March 2006 (UTC) :Sorry HA, actually I have no control over the adsense stuff. It is put there by Wikia which runs wikicities. As part of their Terms of Service, I am not allowed to remove the ads since the ads are what actually pay for hosting here. :As a side matter, we are not anti-Jehovah's witness. You or I may not agree, but we welcome their contributions and their views. It is a large, legitimate denomination with many followers. : -- nsandwich 19:31, 24 March 2006 (UTC) Doh. Well then there might be a problem because a very central tenant of Jehovah's witness belief is that all trinitarians are, quite literally, possesed by Satan as I understand it, are very adament against the idea that Jesus is anything other than Michael the Archangel, and from what I hear their church teaches members that only 144,000 people in the world ever go to heaven. I just don't see how it's compatible with Christianity..... Homestarmy 19:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC) :JWs believe that all Christians who are not JW's are part of a Great Apostasy (read:Trinity), and that they have the real true form of Christianity as it existed in the first century. Saying all that, we should be fair. I had some interesting conversations with them once; but they couldn't convert me, and I couldn't convert them. Perhaps I should have nailed some theses to their Kingdom Hall! Eh, God knows which one of us is right. Archola 20:51, 24 March 2006 (UTC) ::I have a strong feeling we're both right ;). I think that no matter what your particular day-to-day beliefs, so long as you believe in God and heaven and try to live a moral life (meaning, truly believing in your heart that what you are doing is a good deed), then you will end up in heaven. Hopefully we'll see everyone there, and we'll all throw up our hands and say "wow, wasn't all that bickering silly? turns out God loves all of us!" Well... here's hoping anyway! -- nsandwich 21:48, 24 March 2006 (UTC) :::Ephesians 2:8-9 my friend..... The problem is if a side isn't chosen our beliefs are far too diametrically opposed to make an encyclopedia. I personally know that Jehovah's witnesses are not simply non-Christian, but because they do not seek to be born again or have faith in the real Jesus, then if any of them die without the savior, they will go to hell like anyone else would. That is, of course, bad to simply let happen, so if this knowladge base tries to fuse the two systems then anyone else who follows the great commission will (and should) feel obligated to over-right any pro-Jehovah's witness POV regardless of whether they call it Christian or not. And likewise, Jehovah's witnesses who also often have a good deal of zeal may feel that, likewise, they should censor the "Satanic" doctrine of the trinity and any mention of Jesus as God to put forth their own POV. The POVs are strikingly different between Jehovah's witnesses and the Bible, they cannot both be correct. Homestarmy 22:15, 24 March 2006 (UTC) ::::Heh, religous wars are no fun. Like Avery said, it's still kind of up in the air how we should deal with those who are neither Nicenean nor Chalcedonian. Then we can re-enact the Great Schism, Crusades, and Protestant Reformation. And then... ::::Best, I think, to leave it up to God. Best not to boast (Ephesians 2:9). Archola 22:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC) :::::Sorry to butt in again :) But can we stop arguing which side is right and get on with our work? It seems to me that now we put opinions of denominations into different sections, everyone can say what they think. Simple. Easy. No "I am right, you are wrong" ever again (I hope!) --inky 10:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC) I agree. (AOL?) Archola 10:21, 26 March 2006 (UTC) :That is pretty much the NPOV policy......which is where the issue comes in, there's a big difference between a CPOV and an NPOV. Homestarmy 16:31, 26 March 2006 (UTC) ::Unfortunately I can add little to the debate because I don't know enough about JWs. I would like to learn though... I don't think that stuff about non-JW Christians being possessed by Satan is actually true. Nor is the part about a cap on the number of spots in heaven. I read somewhere that those were actually common misconceptions. ::I would like to direct everyone's attention to CKB:What is a Christian. I could have kept the debate on the CPOV talk page but I have a feeling this discussion will be massive enough to warrant its own page, at least for now. So far this same discussion has been scattered all over the place, mostly on user talk pages and it's becoming hard to keep track :) -- nsandwich 17:47, 26 March 2006 (UTC) Very well. Homestarmy 17:48, 26 March 2006 (UTC) It's not exactly NPOV, I mean we are less concerned about Jewish or Muslim or Atheist POV's, although we should still be respectful. Perhaps a NCPOV (Neutral Christian Point of View) or ECPOV (Ecumenical Christian Point of View)? Archola 22:54, 26 March 2006 (UTC) :Well if its neutral like that it won't feel all nice and Christian-y, it'll just feel all sterile like its hiding some argument and is putting diametrically opposed beliefs on an equal pedistal and might get confusing if it happens. Homestarmy 03:16, 27 March 2006 (UTC) ::We can still be ecumenical. Just agree to disagree and let God sort out who's right ;) Also cite different interpretations to the proper denominations. Archola 03:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC) :::But without the ability to assert to users who is right and who is wrong this just becomes a Wikipedia where everyone who has a remotely christian-sounding opinion gets their own soapbox section, that doesn't seem useful to me. Homestarmy 03:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC) CKB's Most Wanted And the Most Wanted Article on CKB is....((drum roll))...Prophet! Considering all the fun you've had listing false prophets on Wikipedia, I thought you might like to write about the real prophets. Also, I didn't want to import the Wikipedia article because of all the stuff about Greek oracles and L. Ron Hubbard. Archola 05:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC) :A perfect example of where we can differ from Wikipedia :) -- nsandwich 05:53, 27 March 2006 (UTC) ::This one shouldn't be difficult, I mean, it's pretty much a dictionary definition Biblically speaking as far as I know. I haven't really helped much on the false prophet article though because we're still debating over the title :(. Homestarmy Bible Verses You know, we do have an online bible so you can look up the appropriate verses. Also it was Peter who saw the sheet lowered from Heaven, not Paul. Archola 23:17, 27 March 2006 (UTC) 28th most wanted article It's down the list a bit, but I think you might have fun with Fundamentalist Christianity. Archola 00:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC) oh yes, oh very yes :D. Homestarmy 01:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC) Pentecostalism Re: your edit summary: "Just what is a Pentecostal, and why do they matter in this article?" Pentecostals are Christians in the Pentecostalism movement. Basically, they emphasize the Holy Spirit a little more than other Christians do. They named themselves after Pentecost (when the Apostles recieved the Holy Spirit as little tongues of fire over their heads). Archola 17:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC) :So what does that have to do with Fundamentalism? I mean, from what I understand of pentecostals, if you don't speak in tongues at some point in your life, you go to Hell. That's.....not fundamentalist. At all. As in, such an idea is not in the Bible. Homestarmy 19:44, 29 March 2006 (UTC) ::I'm not sure that all Pentacostals say that you must speak in tongues to be saved. I think most say that speaking in tongues is one sign that you are saved, but is not the only sign. In other words, you can be saved without speaking in tongues, but you cannot speak in tongues without being saved. ::Personally, I prefer love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control (Galatians 5:22-23). Good fruit. But then again, I am not a Pentacostal. Archola 21:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC) :::The thing of it is, I can't tell what it has to do with Fundamentalism, did the Pentecostals get influenced from it or something? Homestarmy 22:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC) Because they also "adhere to the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy." Archola 22:21, 29 March 2006 (UTC) :Many non-fundamentalists also believe the Bible to be inerrant, why are Pentecostals singled out? :/. Homestarmy 02:45, 30 March 2006 (UTC) ::Because some people are both Fundamentalist and Pentecostal (I've heard Pat Robertson described in this way). It's just there to clarify that Fundamentalism and Pentecostlism are not necessarily the same thing, just as Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism are not necessarily the same thing. They do overlap, though, so the terms may be confusing to an outsider. Archola 08:12, 30 March 2006 (UTC) :::Very well then.....Homestarmy 13:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Law and Gospel Thank you for the Charles Spurgeon quote. I'm also working on updating the article at Wikipedia, so I thought I'd ask if the Evidence Bible states where they got the quote from. Archola 03:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC) Books of the Bible from Theopedia "How could a list be more CPOV?" Easy--add content! The Robosandwich bot automatically adds the CPOV tag to articles imported from AnglicanWiki, OrthodoxWiki and Theopedia. Unfortunately, a lot of the Theopedia articles on the books of the Bible are just lists of chapters ;( Archola 03:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC) :I think my suggestion about adding in evangelistic easter eggs might be good for CPOVing though.... :D Homestarmy 19:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC) ::Especially with Easter only 8 days away! Archola 22:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC) The next chapter of "When Vandals attack" :) OMG, YOU THINK WE JUDGE OURSELVES BY YOUR PATHETIC STANDARDS, YOU PROMOTE SLAVERY IN THE BIBLE, YOU PROMOTE STUPID THINGS SUCH AS "AN EYE FOR AN EYE" AND ARE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS, EVEN THOUGH MOST PRIESTS LIKE TOUCHING LITTLE BOYS. ALL OF YOU CHRISTIANS THINK YOU ARE SO MUCH BETTER BECAUSE YOU HAVE YOUR god, BUT YOUR RELIGION IS SO FATALLY FLAWED IT IS STUPID! EVERY SCIENTIFIC PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT WORKS AGAINST YOUR RELIGION, YOU HAVE TO TRY AND MAKE SOMETHING UP TO COUNTERACT IT, OR SAY THAT IT WAS "god's MASTER PLAN". INTELLIGENT DESIGN IS ONE OF THE GREATEST MISTAKES EVER! WHAT DO YOU THINK OF YOUNG EARTH CREATIONISM? YOU MAY THINK IT IS STUPID, YOU PROBABLY WON'T ADMIT IT, BUT YOU MOST CERTAINLY DO. YOU COULD THINK THAT IT BELIEVES TOO MUCH IN THE BIBLE, AND THAT PEOPLE SHOULDN'T TAKE THINGS TOO LITERALLY. WELL THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME WITH EVERYONE ELSE AND CHRISTIANS. WE THINK YOU SHOULDN'T BASE YOUR LIFE ON SOMETHING THAT WAS WRITTEN 2000 YEARS AGO, AND IS SO OUT OF DATE (UNLESS RULES OF PUNISHMENT IF YOU KILL SLAVES IS STILL RELEVANT? I THINK IT IS OKAY TO HIT A SLAVE IF THEY DIE 3 DAYS LATER, YOU JUST HAVE TO PAY A SMALL FINE OF SILVER). IF GOD LOVED EVERYONE THEN WHY WOULD HE CREATE HELL? WHAT ABOUT THE BOY WHO NEVER ENCOUNTERS CHRISTIANITY IN HIS LIFE, AND IS BROUGHT UP WITH THE IDEA THAT MURDERING IS OKAY? WILL HE GO TO HELL BECAUSE HE MURDERED? BUT THE BOY DIDN'T KNOW ANY BETTER, HOW CAN HE BE BLAMED. HOW CAN HE HAVE THE FREE WILL THAT GOD SUPPOSEDLY GAVE HIM? WHY WOULD GOD PUNISH THIS BOY FOR GROWING UP IN AN AREA WHERE THERE IS NO CHRISTIANITY!!! THERE IS NO TRUE RELIGION. WHO WORSHIPS ROMAN GODS ANY MORE? NOONE, BECAUSE IT IS AN OUTDATED RELIGION, EVERYONE HAS AGREED THAT THOSE GODS DON'T EXIST. BUT I'M CERTAIN THIS WILL HAPPEN WITH ALL MAJOR RELIGIONS TODAY, LATER ON. AND EVERYONE WILL SAY "REMEMBER THOSE IDIOTS WHO USED TO BELIEVE IN A ALL-POWERFUL ALL-LOVING GOD. THAT VERY NAME IS A BLATANT CONTRADICTION. THEY NEEDED SO MUCH COMFORT BECAUSE THEY CAN'T EVEN FACE LIFE ON THEIR OWN, THEY ARE SO WEAK, THAT THEY NEEDED AN IDEA OF A GOD TO CARE AND PROTECT THEM AND TO MAKE THEM FEEL SAFE". RELIGION IS NOTHING MORE THAN A FAD, RELIGIONS WILL BE BORN, AND DIE, AND THEY WILL CAUSE BILLIONS OF HUMANS, TO WASTE THEIR LIVES AS THEY DEDICATE THEM TO THINGS THAT DON'T EXIST. JUDGE ME ALL YOU WANT, BUT "JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED" YOU IDIOT. I PITY YOU, WAKE UP AND ACCEPT THAT YOU ARE ALONE, AND THAT WHEN YOU DIE THERE IS NOTHING LEFT, LIVE LIFE TO THE FULL NOW. ~Death is simply cold unconsciousness. Accept that, and take comfort from it. :Well, im glad your responsive at least :/. Firstly, the slavery of the Deep South was very inconsistant with the humane standards the Old Testiment proposed for slavery, where Slaves were mandated frequent long breaks for numerous reasons, must be allowed to be freed after I think only a year of work, The "Eye for an Eye" is specifically talked about by Jesus as not a part of the New covenant but rather to "Turn the other cheek", and the failings of human preists aside, im not really part of a denomination, so even if Guilt by Association wasn't a logical fallacy, it still wouldn't affect me. :Next, We aren't better than other people....but we are better off. I may also counter that every single time Christians find logical evidence against various flawed bits of science, scientists always seem to have to make something up to counteract it, what a big mistake by science eh? :YEC is awesome, you should try believing it sometime. I recall a certain discovery channel or history channel show where some archaeologist lifted up some bone and said something along the lines of "Even though these bones all look like they are only a couple hundred years old, we know through evolution that they are far older". See, science isn't so great in regards to not believing the bible literally, it allows many people to deny the evidence when its staring them right in the face. The Bible was also written in varying time periods, not just "2000 years ago", and I don't know what your talking about with killing slaves, the Old South's rules were generally very un-Biblical. :God may be a God of love, but He also is infinitly just, otherwise, He cannot be infinitly good. Imagine a judge who is confronted with a rapist who has murder 3 women, and the rapist tells the judge "Well judge, I know i've done wrong, but your such a loving fellow, I believe your going to let me go". Would that be very loving? What about to the families of the rapists victims, do you think they would see the love in the judges unjust decision? And while the boy you speak of may of had his conscience bent so much that he doesn't think murdering is wrong, but that still means the boy will probably have the sense that lying, stealing, theiving, adultery, etc. etc. will still be wrong, its part of having a conscience. The boy would go to Hell without a savior, but it won't be just because the boy murdered, it will be for every sin he has ever commited. The boy would have a conscience to know better than sin is wrong, nobody can be called blameless in this regard. The boy would have the free will to question why his conscience tells him things are wrong, and as he grew up, would have ample oppertunity to question the beliefs his parents or whoever gave him that murdering wasn't wrong, and would live long enough to seek out the truth for himself. :So because the roman religion is ridiculous, all religions must be ridiculous? I may add that many theories in science from the past are ridiculous, but not all theories are considered incorrect today because of that. And by that time, i'd figure that the apocalypse is probably close by if there's such a large level of unbelief, so those people you speak of probably wouldn't have long to gloat. And its not about facing life, its facing the consequences of sin, you have a conscience that tells you right from wrong whether you've bent it heavily out of shape or not, and even if you've somehow managed to suppress it almost compleatly, I doubt you've never had a time when you had to deal with what you conscience told you. :Finally, it's not me you have to worry about; it's God. The standards of God's judgement are written down quite well, there's no need for people to judge anyone when we simply have to pull out the Law and show people that they are already guilty. And by the way, what proof do you have that when people die there is nothing? Has anyone come back and told everyone there is nothing? I think that's a bit doubtful, and a bit silly to say that because you find certain answers to not be to your liking, that therefore there cannot be any answers. Homestarmy 20:20, 21 June 2006 (UTC) ::I believe that everyone gets an opportunity to decide about Christ - if not in this life, then in the "little season" period described in the book of Revelations. So, aborted babies don't go to straight to Hell, and God certainly wouldn't deny anyone the opportunity to make their own decision. (i.e. the "boy" described here) The only question is what decision you are going to make. There is a real war going on between Good and Evil in this world, whether you recognize it or not. The only question is when you are going to realize it and which side you are going to be on. --BenMcLean 20:47, 24 June 2006 (UTC) Reply from my talk page :There were four left, all fixed now. I'll have another check round and see if I can find any more problems left over. (By the way, the Pagan Wiki got hit too - I don't think this was anything to do with them, just someone trying to make trouble between the two sites) -- sannse (talk) 20:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC) ::I can't see any more top-edits on any of the problem accounts. Please shout on a staff talk page or using the http://irc.wikia.com/ web IRC if problems start up again and you need help. Thanks :) -- sannse (talk) 20:58, 21 June 2006 (UTC) Forum:RLDS Christian? I have moved the RLDS conversation to Forum:RLDS Christian? so it doesn't appear to be just between you and me but between anyone who wants to post. --BenMcLean 15:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC)